Natrons vs. Hamilton, Round 2

Hey Nathan, seeing that I am fixated on names - I pulled this from the
team fsx site:

Women's final
1. Kikkan Randall
2. Dasha Gaizova
3. Kate Underpants
4. Ida Sargent

Is #3 for real?

bt

Kate Underpants = Kate Underwood.

There is a lot of partying at Spring Series, so I can only guess how
that came about.

-Nathan

sknyski wrote:
Hey Nathan, seeing that I am fixated on names - I pulled this from the
team fsx site:

Women's final
1. Kikkan Randall
2. Dasha Gaizova
3. Kate Underpants
4. Ida Sargent

Is #3 for real?

bt

Thanks. That's actually pretty funny.

bt

I've taken a great interest in Nathan's recent blog entry and the
website:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...amilton_appeal

and Tyler's site. My point of view is from the scientist doing the
tests, so I might be biased in my take on the whole suspension case.

The defense in a case like this will try to establish that a test is
not accurate, so the whole result should be thrown out. E.g., on
4/29/04, Tyler was tested at a hematocrit of 49.7% with a high HR-OFF
Stimulation Index (SI) and a low reticulocyte. On Tyler's site, they
say the calibration was known to be incorrect that day, but of course
the real question is incorrect by how much? Going from a value HR-OFF
of 123.8 to 132.9 in five days (see the news article) indicated some
manipulation to the UCI, and Tyler was warned.

Then of course were the famous incidents, the Athen's positive A test
with the botched B sample, so the whole test is negative, and the
Vuelta samples testing positive for homologous blood doping. To make
matters worse for Tyler, his roommate tested postive for homologous
blood doping in October.

So the defense will argue that the Athen's test should not be
considered since it could not be retested. There were a number of
arguments against the testing in general, and the roommate incident has
nothing to do with Tyler's case.

Tyler states he had a blood sample stored from the 04 Vuelta, but also
that Tyler transported this sample from Spain to MIT for testing. Wow.
He should have had an independent third party split the sample, have
half tested by the UCI and half sent to MIT. There's some serious chain
of custody issues with Tyler transporting his own sample.

To a jury (or the UCI), I think they probably looked at all the
evidence (nothing was thrown out) and the trend from all these events
was the reason for a suspension.

So Nathan asks, what do you say to a doper? How about looking them
straight in the eye and saying, "I hate dopers. I don't hate the
people, but I hate the choice they make to cheat. I think they should
be banned for life from competition. If you didn't dope we're fine."